| Fla. educators to teach evolution as theory, not settled fact – On Deadline – USATODAY.com — Here we go again. From here it will trend towards alternative theories, then creation science, then the Bible as sole arbiter. |
Students in Florida must be taught that evolution is a theory and not a settled fact, according to standards that the State Board of Education just approved in Tallahasee.
“A panel of 68 experts, heavy with science teachers and scientists, drew up detailed, age-specific standards that described evolution as the basic ‘concept underlying all of biology.’ The standards said evolution was supported by ‘multiple forms of scientific evidence,'” The News-Press, a fellow Gannett paper, says. “In a series of public hearings, several conservative religious leaders and parents objected to evolution being ‘the’ accepted standard. The compromise language approved today cites ‘the scientific theory of evolution,’ making it officially a theory rather than a settled fact.”
I’ve always believed that the teaching of science must be based on the scientific method, which includes an acknowledgement that explanations for everything must be considered as theory, not fact.
We also see this “theory vs. fact” issue with regards to so-called “global warming” (that is, the *belief* our climate is warming due to human activities).
Btw, to answer a prior comment on the law of gravitation. We don’t know *as fact* that F=G*m1*m2/(r^2), but only that this equation fits the measured data very well. Who knows if this is the complete equation of gravitation? How do we not know there are higher terms in the equation that apply on the cosmic scale?
All in all, I have difficulty with the use of the word “fact” by scientists, since it has and will be abused. Scientists must be true skeptics, including skeptical of their own *beliefs*.
What annoys me is this “I believe in …” crap. Evolution is not a religion or a belief system it is a system of facts. You do not believe in Evolution. You can say that the “Theory of …” appears well founded in fact or it is not well founded in fact. Theory is just short of law, in scientific terminology. It means that it explains most of the facts but there is a few mechanisms we don’t understand yet. You can’t even grace creationism with the term Hypothesis. It’s just gobbly gook that some ignorant savage came up with to explain shit he didn’t understand. The ancient Greek or Hindu creation mythos is just as valid as the Christian version, meaning not.
# 12 jbenson2
Something can come from nothing just as -1 and +1 can come from zero.
RBG
#28 Here is the link you were thinking about. Excellent viewing for all..
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/
This is a good time to review the commandments. I’m not sure what happened to #1 but here you go. Also, #2 looks more like a declaration than a commandment. #7 is a shocker and it looks like no way out of that one. Not even hail mary’s. Does Holy Shit count?
These are from wikipedia.
2 I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;
3 Do not have any other gods before Me.
4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,
6 but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
7 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
8 Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
9 For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
10 But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and consecrated it.
12 Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
13 You shall not murder.
14 You shall not commit adultery.
15 You shall not steal.
16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
17 You shall not covet your neighbour’s house; you shall not covet your neighbour’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.
OK,
1) Life forms change over time, from bacteria to whales. This is incontrovertible. This is the FACT of evolution.
2) The THEORY of evolution is what people use to describe our current understanding of how life forms change over time. There is some debate over the details (just as there is in any field of science), but the general overall theory of evolution is exceptionally robust and testable and well accepted by the scientific community.
You may disagree with aspects of the THEORY of evolution, this is fine. You are even welcome to present a new THEORY of evolution. Scientists will listen to you if your theory is testable, predictive and repeatable.
Creationism is not testable. It does not belong in science class, it is not science.
It should not be taught alongside the FACT of evolution.
If you disagree with the FACT of evolution you are a blind fool.
#23 said: but that instant of creation AND what existed before that is the subject of conjecture or hypothesis.
If you bothered to read my comments, I said I did not have a position on this because no one knows the answer. However, it does look like you confirmed exactly what I said. You don’t have a clue either on what created the universe either.
p.s. Bobo – based on your postings, you selected a very appropriate name
Provided they actually teach what it means for something to be a scientific theory, there should be no problem here.
Cell Theory, Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. Both unprovable, barring time travel, or an infinite knowledge of the universe, however both have never been disproven, and evidence has continued to mount in support of these since their creation. Both are easily observable natural phenomena.
They wouldn’t be SCIENTIFIC theories if there wasn’t near overwhelming evidence in support of them. Technically speaking, any single instance for which one doesn’t hold, in other words a creature not made of cells but still satisfying the requirements for something to be alive, or a creature which clearly defies the parameters of natural selection would disprove the theories.
Why is it ignorance and religous fanatacism seem to go hand in hand?
#35, Dallas,
And your point is?
#37, jbenson,
You don’t have a clue either on what created the universe either.
But at least atheists can admit it.
This is such a tired argument–it really does make one weary. S.J. Gould wrote one of the most lucid explanations years ago, available at:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html
BTW, in that picture, the middle one is James Hill’s sister, Edna. On the left is James’ father and the father of Edna’s oldest, Zacariah. On the right is James’ younger brother and the father of Edna’s fourth and sixth child, Doobie, aka Light Bulb as he is the brightest in the family.
#37–jb==what I was keying off in your post at #12 was: “neither side has any proof” and the thread was about evolution which only argumentatively goes to the Big Bang.
Now, when you say “I have no idea” and then equate two things that are almost opposite to one another based on faulty characterizations, I think you ARE taking a position. Not expressly, but if I gave you too much credit for being somewhat subtle, I do apologize.
My nick is bobbo with 3 b’s–so, yes, it is quite appropriate and if again you wish to mischaracterize it as bobo to make your point, that too is acceptable.
#1 – Evolution is a theory, they are agreeing to call it what it is.
Well… No… Not really…
But Florida is a gene pool crying out for chlorine, so let them be stupid.
#40–tmg===Great review==thanks.
#12 – jbenson2
“I have no idea which is correct.”
Well, at least you started well. You do have no idea.
“What I find interesting is how the scientists believe in their view as strongly as the religious people…”
…and right there you stick your foot firmly into your mouth.
“…and neither side has any proof to support their position.”
Where did that insane idea come from? Science ONLY accepts what there is proof for. Science, first and foremost, is ABOUT PROOF.
That has to be the single most idiotic statement on this thread.
THE VERY THING THAT DIFFERENTIATES SCIENCE FROM RELIGION IS THAT SCIENCE REQUIRES GENUINE, SOLID PROOF. RELIGION’S STANDARD OF PROOF IS NONEXISTENT.
“…neither side has any proof…”??? You need to go hang your head in shame for making such an incredibly, utterly false statement.
SCIENCE HAS 100% OF THE PROOF. THAT IS WHY IT IS SCIENCE. IT DOES NOT RELY ON THE IGNORANT, PRIMITIVE, EMOTIONAL MYTHS OF SCIENTIFICALLY-ILLITERATE PEOPLE. RELIGION HAS ZERO PROOF.
Uncountable millions upon millions of people over the last few thousands of years have thereby spent BILLIONS OF YEARS trying to find ONE SINGLE PIECE OF A HINT OF A FRAGMENT OF ONE SUBATOMIC PARTICLE OF EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS THAT AN INVISIBLE MAN IN THE SKY WHO LOOKS LIKE US JUST POOFED EVERYTHING INTO EXISTENCE.
All those people. All those years. Not even the faintest shadow of any evidence of any kind, anywhere, ever.
That, to put it very mildly, IS NOT A COINCIDENCE.
“Science
In the beginning there was nothing. Which exploded.”
You can’t really be that obstinately dense, can you?
Science does not have anything to say about the ORIGINS OF LIFE. There is NO EVIDENCE.
Evolution has NOTHING TO DO WITH ORIGINS. ZERO. ZIP. NADA. It is about the proven fact that over great lengths of time, in response to pressures from their environment, certain living things are better suited to survive than others. And when they survive, through the facts of genetics, their descendants inherit the traits that allow them to do a better job of surviving than others. So they are more successful. The less-successful die out.
NOT ONE BIT OF THAT HAS ANYTHING REMOTELY TO DO WITH WHERE LIFE ORIGINALLY CAME FROM. SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE CURRENTLY KNOWN TO US REGARDING THE ULTIMATE ORIGINS OF LIFE, SCIENCE DOES NOT OFFER ANY EXPLANATION. But the frightened, insecure human mind will invent simple, lowest-common-denominator crap that it can easily grasp to fill in those places where facts and evidence aren’t available.
But whatever the origin of life may be, it take the gullibility of a rather slow, gullible child to entertain the thought for even one second that some GREAT BIG INVISIBLE GUY WHO LOOKS JUST EXACTLY LIKE US AND CAN MAGICALLY DO ANYTHING HE WANTS JUST SNAPPED HIS FINGERS, AND EVERYTHING JUST “POOFED” INTO EXISTENCE.
That you can sit there, using the astonishing achievements of computer science and space travel which facilitate instantaneous communication between people all over the planet, to proclaim that a ridiculous fairytale with absolutely ZERO evidence to support it, and incalculable tons of evidence AGAINST it, is the explanation for the existence of life on this planet, is beyond pathetic.
I have to quote Issac Asimov here:
Creationists make it sound like a ‘theory’ is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night
#45 said: SCIENCE HAS 100% OF THE PROOF.
You posted a lot of SHOUTING and made statements about proof, but most of it was just blowhard comments that had nothing to do with proof. (Do you get paid by the keystroke?)
Then you say Science does not have anything to say about the ORIGINS OF LIFE. There is NO EVIDENCE.
And that my friend is exactly what I have said all along.
# 6. "It is an incontrovertible fact that organisms have changed, or evolved, during the history of life on Earth."
I agree because that statement is a straightforward Bible doctrine. Remarkably, the book of Genesis says that all animals were created as herbivores (Genesis 1:30). Then a curse came upon the world. Originally, snakes could fly. After the curse, snakes would have to go about on their bellies (Genesis 3:14).
You want proof?
Here is your proof
Vestigial organs, fossils, comparative anatomy, and molecular phylogeny.
Dolt!
Oh why don’t you look into the Miller-Urey experiment too? While it doesn’t “prove” how life began it shows that when the right conditions are present molecules can form complex amino acids which are used to make proteins. It also produced certain nucleic acids. Guess what is classified as a nucleic acid? That right DNA and RNA. While it didn’t produce those particular two it showed that the structures of life could be produced chemically which is a hell of a lot more “proof” religion has ever presented.
Persoanlly I find these arguments rather silly. There’s evidence of evolution all around us! Lord knows, man himself has taken his own role in the evolution of the species. We have bred almost every shape and size of dog imaginable and we have designed horses to suit various tasks. Collectively, man is the greatest force of evolution on the planet. from heiki crabs off the coats of Japan to cats and yet creationists would rather choose to believe that while WE have the power to change and evolve animals around us but God doesn’t or doesn’t choose to do so. I don’t understand why evolution cannot be part of God’s plan for us, that evolution is a way God uses to help man and animals to adapt to the changing world around us.
#51 Bytowner
“I don’t understand why evolution cannot be part of God’s plan for us, that evolution is a way God uses to help man and animals to adapt to the changing world around us.”
I asked that too a long time ago. The answer was that Genesis is the first book of the bible and the bible is the word of god. So, if it is the first words of god and it is wrong how reliable is the rest and why should they believe any of it? As part of their faith they must oppose evolution.
Ah, what would we do without religion? Without it, we’d have no idea why snakes are forced to crawl instead of fly (see #48), and we’d be completely oblivious to why women are forced to suffer great pain in childbirth (Genesis 3:16). So many of our greatest mysteries would still be unsolved. It’s bad enough that we still have no explanation for why some Floridians have long beards and large bellies (nice photo at top) 😉
I suspect a lot of you guys are missing the point.
Reading between the lines of the article, I gather that Florida is teaching evolution as one theory, among others.
(As opposed to teaching it as the overwhelmingly accepted theory vs various religious mythologies.)
#52: The fundies can oppose evolution all they want, but it still happens. See Copernicus…
OK all. Don’t blame God for mans ignorance. I see two types of evolution. The one that doesn’t float is that man evolved from monkeys or baboons (although the guy in the middle could be evolving back). If we evolved from monkeys, there would be no monkeys left alive. There is second and natural evolution that is visibly fact. Example in case is the mutation of flu viruses that happens.
To deny there is a God is just plan foolish. Because you can’t explain Him doesn’t mean He is not real. You can’t see air, but there is circumstantial and scientific (Proven by experimentation) evidence it is there.
Bible studiers must remember that there are things in the Bible that takes belief and faith to accept. You have to believe there is a God to believe some if the things in there really happened. As I have carefully read parts of it, it is clear the earth was here before it was “remodeled” by God. The bible can also support there were living beings on earth before “Adam” and “Eve”. I know God is real. I have personally experienced things that prove it.
# 56 Hillary C. said, The one that doesn’t float is that man evolved from monkeys or baboons … If we evolved from monkeys, there would be no monkeys left alive
Where did YOU learn evolution? If you’re going to argue against evolution, you should at least understand what the theory.
Evolution doesn’t theorize that humans evolved from the EXISTING monkeys swinging in trees today. It postulates that humans evolved along the same lines as the other primates.
By the way, I respect that you have an existential belief in God. (I share this.) But don’t use the word “prove.” Especially when you just argued for the circular nature of faith in the same paragraph!
If you go read the PDF of what FL is teaching it’s pretty clear that they are teaching science not philosophy or religion. They are not (#54) teaching evolution among other theories.
Florida to be the site for research into Human DEVOLUTION – BACK TO IDIOCY !!! Florida HS Grads will no longer be eligible for admission to real colleges !!! Thump Your Bibles, Florida, and kiss your A$$ goodbye !!!